View source for Krsna is not for a particular society or particular religious community or particular country or particular time. No. Krsna is the leader of all men for all the time in all the countries, worlds & universes. He is not a sectarian Personality of Godhead

<div id="compilation">
<div id="facts">
{{terms|"Krsna is not for a particular society or particular religious community or particular country or particular time. No. Krsna is the leader of all men for all the time in all the countries in all the worlds and all the universes. So He is not a sectarian Personality of Godhead"}}
{{notes|}}
{{compiler|Visnu Murti}}
{{complete|ALL}}
{{first|29Feb12}}
{{last|29Feb12}}
{{totals_by_section|BG=0|SB=0|CC=0|OB=0|Lec=1|Con=0|Let=0}}
{{total|1}}
{{toc right}}
[[Category:Krsna Is Not]]
[[Category:Particular]]
[[Category:Society]]
[[Category:religious]]
[[Category:Community]]
[[Category:Country]]
[[Category:time]]
[[Category:Time, Place and Circumstances]]
[[Category:Krsna Is]]
[[Category:Leaders]]
[[Category:All]]
[[Category:men]]
[[Category:world]]
[[Category:Universe]]
[[Category:Sectarian]]
[[Category:Supreme Personality of Godhead]]
</div>
<div id="Lectures" class="section" sec_index="4" parent="compilation" text="Lectures"><h2>Lectures</h2>
</div>
<div id="Bhagavad-gita_As_It_Is_Lectures" class="sub_section" sec_index="0" parent="Lectures" text="Bhagavad-gita As It Is Lectures"><h3>Bhagavad-gita As It Is Lectures</h3>
</div>
<div id="LectureonBG32125NewYorkMay301966_0" class="quote" parent="Bhagavad-gita_As_It_Is_Lectures" book="Lec" index="125" link="Lecture on BG 3.21-25 -- New York, May 30, 1966" link_text="Lecture on BG 3.21-25 -- New York, May 30, 1966">
<div class="heading">Manuṣyāḥ means all men. All men. So Kṛṣṇa is not for a particular society or particular religious community or particular country or particular time. No. Kṛṣṇa is the leader of all men for all the time in all the countries in all the worlds and all the universes. So He is not a sectarian Personality of Godhead. We should know. Manuṣyāḥ. Manuṣyāḥ, it is plural number: "All men." All men.
</div>
<span class="link">[[Vanisource:Lecture on BG 3.21-25 -- New York, May 30, 1966|Lecture on BG 3.21-25 -- New York, May 30, 1966]]: </span><div style="display: inline;" class="text"><p style="display: inline;">Now people are trying to travel in the space, but the yogis can travel in the space very swiftly, more swifter than any sputnik. Just like the other day I narrated, the Durvāsā Muni traveled all over the space in the universe and outside the universe, and he came back within one year. So therefore Kṛṣṇa's another name is Yogeśvara. Yogeśvara. There are many yogis and many yogic principle, but Kṛṣṇa is the master of all yoga. So if ordinary yogis, they can display some wonders, so why not Kṛṣṇa? He is the Yogeśvara; He is the lord of all yogis. So by performance of this yoga-prakriya(?), or the yogic mystic powers, one cannot become God. God is different from all of them. So Kṛṣṇa was that God. So His manifestations, His work...</p>
<p>Now, here He says which I was going to explain from Vedic scripture. So Kṛṣṇa says, na me pārthāsti kartavyam: "I have nothing to do." He has nothing to do; still, He is so powerful? Yes. That is confirmed in the Vedic scripture, that Brahman, the nature of Brahman, is described like this, na tasya kāryam karaṇaṁ ca vidyate: "The nature of Brahman is that He has nothing to do." He has nothing to do. That is the difference between God and ourself. We have to do everything to achieve a certain aim, but God has nothing to do. Na tasya kāryaṁ karaṇaṁ ca vidyate na tat-samaś cābhyadhikaś ca dṛśyate: "And nobody is found who is equal to Him and or greater than Him." Nobody is found. These are the definition in the Vedic literature, that "God has nothing to do. Nobody is equal to Him, and nobody is greater than Him."</p>
<p>That means everyone is below Him. Everyone is below Him. Nobody can be equal with God. Even such great demigods like Śiva and Brahmā... They are considered to be the highest demigods. Still, in the scriptures it is said that nobody should place all these demigods, even Śiva and Brahmā, on equal footing with Viṣṇu, Viṣṇu the Supreme Personality of Godhead, or Kṛṣṇa. So Kṛṣṇa has nothing to do. God, who is actually God, He has nothing to do. He has nothing to do. He is God from the very beginning. And He is all-powerful with all opulences. That is the God. So Kṛṣṇa says, "I have nothing to do," triṣu lokeṣu kiñcana, "not only in this earth, but in the three worlds, anywhere, anywhere I can go, anywhere I can work, anywhere I can see. But still, I have nothing to do."</p>
<p>Na anavāptam avāptavyam: "It is not that I am deficient in My possession." We work because we find deficient ourself. In any power, in any, either spiritual power or material power, we have to work because we are deficient. So Kṛṣṇa is not deficient so that He has to fill up the deficiency. No. Na anavāptam. So still, varta eva ca karmaṇi. Now, He says that "Arjuna, you see that still, I have engaged Myself in the worldly duties." Why? Just to become the ideal man. Although He was not man, He was God, because He was playing the part of a man, therefore He was...</p>
<p>Why He was taking part in the battlefield? He had nothing to gain out of it personally, but why He was taking part in the battlefield? Just for the right cause. So He wanted to establish that for right cause there must be fighting. You cannot abolish violence from the world. This is the instruction of Kṛṣṇa in Bhagavad-gītā. If required, violence will be taken. And Kṛṣṇa induced Arjuna to be violent. Arjuna wanted to be nonviolent, but He wanted that "You should. You must fight. This fight is arranged by Me." So these examples.</p>
<p>These are the examples. Nothing is bad... Nothing is good if it is not purposeful. That is the whole purpose of teaching Bhagavad-gītā. Nothing is good; nothing is bad. Everything is good, everything is bad, in this material world, but we have to see. Just like the common phrase goes, "The end justifies the means. The end justifies the means." So that is Kṛṣṇa teaching here that He has nothing to gain. He is full in Himself. But just to set examples in the world He was taking part in the fighting because He wanted to establish it that fighting for good cause should not be avoided. That was His mission.</p>
<p>Then further He says,</p>
:yadi hy ahaṁ na varteyaṁ
:jātu karmaṇy atandritaḥ
:mama vartmānuvartante
:manuṣyāḥ pārtha sarvaśaḥ
:([[Vanisource:BG 3.23|BG 3.23]])
<p>Manuṣyāḥ. Now just see. Here it is said. Manuṣyāḥ means all men. All men. So Kṛṣṇa is not for a particular society or particular religious community or particular country or particular time. No. Kṛṣṇa is the leader of all men for all the time in all the countries in all the worlds and all the universes. So He is not a sectarian Personality of Godhead. We should know. Manuṣyāḥ. Manuṣyāḥ, it is plural number: "All men." All men. So He said, "If I do not set example by My practical work, then because I am the leader of all men, all living entities, they will be wrongly directed." Wrongly directed.</p>
<p>Now, actually we see also. At least in India we have got this experience. Now, this Bhagavad-gītā... The Bhagavad-gītā, we always... We must always remember that it is being taught in the actual battlefield. Now, a great personality like Mahātmā Gandhi, he wanted to prove from Bhagavad-gītā nonviolence. He was... He was in favor of the doctrine of nonviolence. Now, you have seen Mahatma Gandhi's picture that he is always standing with Bhagavad-gītā like this. So Bhagavad-gītā  was his life and soul practically. And in the morning he was having Bhagavad-gītā class; in the evening he was having Bhagavad-gītā class. So that was his life and soul. But unfortunately he interpreted Bhagavad-gītā in his own way. Although he took Bhagavad-gītā as his life and soul, so, but he interpreted it in his own way. That is not the way of understanding Bhagavad-gītā. Therefore such a great man and such a good man... He was not only a great man; he was very good man in the worldly estimation. His character, his behavior, his dealing—everything was good. He was ideal personality. But just see. He was killed by violence. He could not stop violence.</p>
</div>
</div>
</div>